Since the attractiveness of Captain Jack is ubiquitous, I'd say his inclusion is the ultimate data point. For any argument.

Absolutely

Interesting point. For the sake of definition I'd say that having, or being open to having, more than one relationship would be required. Situations may result in individuals who identify as polyamorous only seeing one person or even no persons, though that wouldn't negate their self-identifying as polyamorous, though they may not currently be in a polyamorous relationship, any more than not currently having a parter of the same sex would prevent that person from self-identifying as a homosexual and wow was that a runon sentence!

Heh, one thing about me, I'm never worried about being "reasonable" or "nice"! :-)

Thanks. I'm not perfect, but I try my damndest to be aware of the indoctrination that our society imposes on us and to fight against it.

You're welcome!

I think it's very romantic (and hot!) Who doesn't want to hear someone tell them they want to have sex with them? ;-)

We've taught our children to evaluate people based on their words and actions and to be understanding and tolerant. We've taught them to respect people and to question ideas and beliefs. We would never in a million years tell our kid to not play with a neighbor because they were christian (or hindu or muslim, etc). That makes no sense. In the same vein, we didn't teach our kids that there was no god or try to indoctrinate him, either. As I've blogged before we let him develop his own beliefs. Sure, we explain our own and why we feel the way we do, but we don't tell them they have to believe the way we do. I haven't met an atheist with kids yet who has taught their kid differently.

Hey! It's coming along well. How does this comment look?

Thank you, sir.